For over a century, the contributions of Dr. Alfred Adler (1870-1937) have been central to
psychology and psychotherapy since at least 1902. As will be seen, his ideas and methods
appear in the theory and practice of nearly all psychologies and counseling approaches
used in the present time.1 This chapter introduces the man and his development Individual
Psychology.
The modern era of interest in psychological ideas is connected in the public
mind with Sigmund Freud, and there can be no doubt about his influence. Two specific
events are key to ushering in that era: his publication in 1900 of The Interpretation of
Dreams, and his joining with Alfred Adler in 1902 to seek psychological treatments for the
neuroses At that time, the neuroses were largely equated with the diagnosis of hysteria,
the conversion of emotional issues into physical complaints.
Freud was the founder of Psycho-Analysis and psychodynamic theory. Yet
Adlers contributions, and his Individual Psychology as a theory of personality and
therapeutic method, have had a marked effect on the field. The Ansbachers note that:

When we hear such expressions as feelings of inferiority and insecurity, striving for
self-enhancement and power, womans revolt against her feminine role, the
oversolicitous mother, the dethronement of the first-born, the need for affection, etc.,
we are meeting ideas in which Alfred Adler was the pioneer from 1907 until his death
in 1937. (Ansbachers, 1954.)

Indeed, Adler made many original
contributions to what was then an emerging field. It could be argued that nearly
everything he did became the foundation for what would come later:

Humanistic/Existential
psychologies: The writings of Carl Rogers, Viktor Frankl, Abrahm
Maslow, and Rollo May (all at some time students of Adler) often restate Adlerian
concepts. Rollo May is generally considered the official "founder" of
existential psychology and therapy; Abraham Maslow is generally considered the official
"founder" of Humanistic psychology and therapy. Also, much of what became the
"human potential movement," including "encounter groups" and
"Gestalt therapy," owe much to Adlers ideas.

Neo-Freudians:
It has been suggested that these might better be called
"neo-Adlerians." Benjamin Wolman, in his textbook on psychological theories,
says,

It has to be said that
Adlers influence is much greater than is usually admitted. The entire
neo-psychoanalytic school, including [Karen] Horney, [Eric] Fromm, and [Harry Stack]
Sullivan, is no less neo-Adlerian than it is neo-Freudian. Adlers concepts of
sociability, self-assertion, security, self, and creativeness permeated the theories of
the neo-analysts. (Wolman, 1960, p. 298.)

The inclusion of social forces on
personality by neo-Freudians seem to come more from Adler than Freud. Indeed, the
similarity of "neo-Freudian" ideas and those of Adler has led to the observation
that, "A graduate student would run the risk of being accused of plagiarism if he
were to approach another writer so closely." (Allen, 1971, p. 22) Stepansky reminds
us, that neo-Freudians may have been as much influenced by social conditions of the 1930s
and 1940s as by Adlers earlier ideas.

Cognitive
Therapy: Rational-Emotive Therapy (Ellis), Cognitive Therapy (Beck),
and Neuro-Linguistic Programming (Bandler and Grinder) seem to include many restatements
of Adlers earlier ideas, as will be explored later in detail.

Transactional
Analysis:Objective observers have noted there are many similarities
between major Adlerian concepts and Bernes Transactional Analysis, such as
similarities between the "games" of Bernes Games People Play and
Adlers Problems of Neurosis, and Bernes "Life Scripts" and
Adlers "Life Style."

Psychoanalysis:Freudian Joost Meerloo noted that, "the whole body of psychoanalysis and
psychiatry is imbued with Adlers ideas, although few want to acknowledge this fact.
We are all plagiarists, though we hate to confess it. The whole body of social psychiatry
would have been impossible without Adlers pioneering zest. (Meerloo, 1970)

Ego
Psychology:This expansion of psychoanalysis and stressing of the Ego
contains much that Adler first discussed. The minutes of the meeting of the third
"debate" in 1911 have Freud complaining that Adler presented an "ego
psychology" rather than a "psychology of the unconscious." (see Stepansky,
pp. 126-127)

It could be argued that nearly every
theory and method of modern psychological treatment employed today has roots in or a
similarity with something Adler said or did. Therapists themselves may not realize how
"Adlerian" they really are. Yet more than any other, Adler seems to be behind
what they do and why they do it. As psychiatrist Joseph Wilder put it, "The proper
question is not whether one is Adlerian but how much of an Adlerian one is."
(Ansbachers, 1973, p. 13). Of major theorist-practitioners, only Albert Ellis (Rational
Emotive Therapy) and Aaron Beck (Cognitive Therapy) acknowledge their debt to Adler.
(Corsini, 1973, pp. 167; Beck, 1976, p. 22.) Both claim, however, to have come upon their
approaches independently, and look at Adler as a forerunner, not a direct influence. So
while practitioners may not know that Adler pioneered the ideas that guide their work,
methods, or modalities (group therapy, family therapy, marital therapy, for three
examples), they use them all the same.

Central is Adlers idea that
the focus of counseling is to alter a clients perceptual scheme (apperceptiveschema), the subjective viewpoint that lies behind mistaken thinking, the
neurotic Life Style, Private Logic, the clients Guiding Goal, Guiding Line, and
Guiding Movement, and more. This fundamental idea is basic to most therapies practiced
today, from Gestalt Therapy and Transactional Analysis to the "cognitive"
therapies of Ellis, Beck, and Bandler. Neuro-Linguistic Programming speaks of
"reframing" the clients subjective framework, which seems to be
essentially the same thing.

We turn now
to look at Adler himself. (Note:
This is a rather long and detailed biography of Dr. Adler)

Alfreds
father, Leopold, the son of a Jewish grain merchant, was born in Burgenland, a buffer
state between Austria and Hungary, in 1835. Some time in 1850s or 1860s he moved to
Penzing, a rural town outside Vienna, Austria, where he met and married Pauline Beer. They
and their children were citizens of Hungary. Alfred gained Austrian citizenship in 1911.
The family moved several times in Alfreds childhood and youth, including twice to
Leopoldstadt, one of Viennas several "Jewish quarters."

First
came Sigmund, in 1868, then Alfred, born on February 7, 1870 in Rudolphsheim, a village
outside Vienna,. Adler always believed that his older brother over-shadowed him. Then came
two girls. One brother died in infancy. Two of Adlers early recollections (ERs)
suggest how childhood illnesses focused The Problem he came to believe he would have to
solve in life, as well as its Solution:

One
of my earliest recollections is of sitting on a bench, bandaged up on account of
rickets,with my healthy elder brother [Sigmund, two years Adlers senior] sitting
opposite me. He could run, jump, and move about quite effortlessly, while for me movement
of any sort was a strain and an effort. Everyone went to great pains to help me, and my
mother and father did all that was in their power to do. At the time of this recollection
I must have been about two years old. (Mosak & Kopp, 1972, p. 9)

When
I was five I became ill with pneumonia and was given up by the physician. A second
physician advised a treatment just the same, and in a few days I became well again. . . .
From that time on I recall always thinking of myself in the future as a physician. This
means that I had set a goal from which I could expect to end my childhood distress, my
fear of death. . . . So I came to choose the occupation of physician in order to overcome
death and the fear of death. (Ansbachers, 1964, p. 199)

Here
we find reflections of Adlers later concepts of Early Recollections, Fictional Final
Goal, Compensation, Ideal Image, Inferiority, and Courage in Striving. But one of
Adlers childhood memories was not what it seemed to be. Sperber says:

As
a six-year-old boy, [Adler] was gripped with a horrible fear on the way to and from school
because he could not avoid going past a cemetery. This fear became more unbearable when he
saw that other children who took the same route remained fearless and uninhibited. One day
he decided to come earlier than usual and forced himself to climb back and forth over the
cemetery wall, and so rid himself of his fear. Years later he met an old schoolmate who
had lived in the neighborhood and taken the same path. Adler reminded him of the cemetery
and spoke of his own fear of it. However, the schoolmate, a perfectly reliable witness,
informed him that the cemetery had never existed and that the memory...was based on an
occurrence which Adler had fabricated, not experienced. Adler returned to the spot and was
forced to concede that his heroic deed had indeed been a fantasy. [Adler] continued to
relate this story to his students in order to append the instructive epilogue. For from
this self-deception he had drawn a multitude of conclusions. (Sperber, 1974, pp.14-15)

Indeed,
Adlerians know that many of the ERs clients relate are not entirely factual. However,
people believe what they believe, and act as if their beliefs are true. So even fabricated
ERs serve a purpose as ways a person views self, others, and the world. In cases where
clients cannot recall an early recollection, the therapist may suggest that they make one
up. Adler believed that, invariably, such fictive recollections will still accurately
reflect some early lesson about life.

Adler
says his mother pampered him until a brother was born. When she transferred her attention
to the new-born, Adler said, "I felt dethroned, and turned to my father, whose
favorite I was." His fathers advice, "Never take anything for granted, but
find out everything for yourself" became Adlers life-long motto. Hoffman notes
that one Passover, young Alfred decided to stay up all night to see if, as hed been
told, an angel would come to "inspect" the home to make sure it contained only
unleavened bread. He substituted some leavened bread for the matzos in the cupboard, and
later said "I was not altogether surprised when the angel did not turn up." (p.
9)

Adler:
School Years

In
1879, Adler attended the Sperlgymnasium (where Freud had been a student in 1865) and, when
the family moved to Hernals in 1881, he attended the Hernalser Gymnasium until he was 18.
Hoffman (p. 15) describes schooling of the time as being boring, rigorous, with rote
learning and without personal challenge. For eight years, the students were drilled in
Latin, Greek, German language, German literature, history, and geography, mathematics,
physics, and religion. The dominant teaching method seems to have been pointing out
student mistakes, and entirely lacking in positive encouragement. Also, Adler entered his
school career a year younger than his classmates, and always felt a little behind and,
therefore, always needing to catch up. Doubtless there is something here which is related
to his later idea of "inferiority" and the need to move from a "minus"
to a "plus" position in life.

Adlers
parents raised their children as nominal Jews, and were technically observant during
Adlers childhood. The goal of middle-class Jewish families of that time (freed from
anti-Semitic laws and restrictions of the previous century) was to assimilate into the
dominant culture in order to get ahead both economically and socially. As a young married
man, Adler joined a Protestant church to ensure his children some sort of religious
education. He encouraged his children to read the Bible "for its psychological wisdom
and insights into human nature." (Hoffman, p. 9)

Like
other middle-class Jews of the period, Adlers parents wanted at least one son to
enter a profession. Thus his schooling took the academic rather than trade-school track.
Young Alfred began his schooling aimed at medicine, which became more important when his
older brother had to drop out of school to help with the family business. When Adler did
poorly in mathematics, his father threatened to apprentice him to a cobbler, which
apparently had an effect, since Adler led his class in math from then on.

In
the Fall of 1888, Adler entered the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Vienna, to
become a practicing physician. He completed his first of three qualifying exams in 1892,
and then fulfilled the first half of a year-long military obligation. After two more
qualifying exams, he received his medical degree in 1895, completing his internship as a
volunteer at the Viennese Policlinic. He then did the second half of his military
obligation, and returned for two years of postgraduate training in psychiatry.

In
1899 he opened a private practice as an internist, then turned to the specialties of
neurology and psychiatry. He and his new wife, Raissa, set up an apartment in the same
building as his office, in a lower-middle-class neighborhood with a large Jewish
population. Indications are that Adler worked hard, often with little sleep, to build his
medical practice.

A
word about medical education in Austria at the time: Hoffman (pp. 19-23) describes the
situation as grim. Emphasis was on diagnosis, rather than treatment or patient care. The
Austrian approach was called "therapeutic nihilism" by the rest of the European
medical community. The poor feared going to the hospital because chances were great they
would die there; incoming patients had to pay in advance! Patients were treated as
teaching experiments rather than for their illness. All who died were autopsied to advance
diagnostic skills, not medical treatment.

Adler
developed an interest in socialism sometime in the mid-1890s, not for its politics but its
"optimistic viewpoint that peoples lives could be immeasurably enhanced through
specific societal action" (Hoffman, p. 22). He read Marx and Engels, wrote editorials
for local newspapers on how social conditions contribute to illness, engaged in heated
discussions at a local café, and also attended socialist meetings. It was at such a
meeting that he may have met his future wife.

Adler:
His Marriage and Family

In
the summer of 1897, he met Raissa Timofeyewna Epstein. December 23 the same year, they
married in Smolensk, Russia. He was 27, she 24. Hoffman (p. 25) suggests they may have met
at a socialist meeting, but also notes Adler never wrote or spoke of their meeting, and
both Alexandra and Kurt told Hoffman that they never heard their father speak of it.

Raissa,
the second daughter of affluent Jewish parents, was born in Russia in 1873. As a female,
she was not allowed to enroll in Moscow University, so went to the University of Zurich,
where she was discovered socialism, an interest that continued when she moved to Vienna in
1897. According to Hoffman, Adler "felt immediately exhilarated by her intelligence,
idealism, and life-minded commitment to world betterment through socialist activity."
(p. 26) Hooper & Holford relate that she "overwhelmed young Dr. Adler with her
brains, idealism, and determination to change the world; [she was] an exotic new
woman." (p. 39)

Alfred
and Raissa had four children: Valentine (1898), Alexandra (1901), Kurt (1905), and Nelly
(1909). Alexandra and Kurt became Adlerian psychiatrists in New York City, and were active
in promoting Individual Psychology. "Val" emigrated to Russia in about 1933,
only to die in a Siberian gulag. Nelly remained in Vienna to pursue an acting career, and
eventually moved to the US..

In
1898, Adler published his Health Book for the Tailoring Trade, in which he not
only pioneered a psychological approach to problems in the work place, but also introduced
some of the ideas that would later appear in Individual Psychology. He urged the medical
establishment to look at how illness among workers in this "cottage industry"
could be traced to working conditions. He suggested that treatment should include social
factors and changes in working conditions. One direct result of this small book was that
several new laws were passed based on Adlers suggestions.

In
1908, Adolf Joffe, a journalist with the exile socialist newspaper Pravda (whose editor
was Leon Trotsky), came to Adler for treatment of a morphine addiction. Joffe (later a key
figure in Lenins Bolshevik government) spoke highly of Adler to Trotsky. The two men
met and for the five years the Trotskys lived in Vienna, the families were close friends.
Kurt Adler recalls that the two men would play chess or take the children to the park on
weekends, while the wives, Nathalia and Raissa, stayed home to discuss socialism and their
Russian homeland. Raissa became a dedicated Trotskyite, and even more dedicated to social
change in her homeland.

Alfred
and Raissa were happy the first several years, but tensions developed as it became clearer
that they had different ideas about what was important. Adler sought to establish himself
as a major contributor to psychological theory and psychiatric practice. Raissa became
increasingly political active in socialist circles. By 1912 the differences were enough
that Raissa took the children to Russia for "an extended vacation," actually a
marital separation.

In
1914, with war imminent, Adler wrote asking her to return. But now, as a Russian, she was
technically an enemy of her Austrian husband! With typical direct action, she gained an
audience with the Czar and swore she was a loyal Russian who had been forced to marry an
Austrian. (Hooper & Holford, pp.96-97). Of the change in Raissa induced by this
separation, the novelist Phyllis Bottome wrote:

She
was no longer the ex-Russian student with all that implied, but a balanced woman of the
world, well-dressed, well-groomed, taking her place as wife and mother with dignified
sophistication at first wholly strange to her. Her large and generous heart was still the
same, but I think it was no longer disturbed and broken. It was as if Raissa had taken a
new grip on the world, and now faced it with a chastened and wiser courage. I
dont say [she] was any happier with Adler, but from the time she returned, [she] was
ready to play her part with strength and dignity in her own home." (Bottome, p. 37)

From
this point, Raissa became important in Austrian politics, and viewed her political
strivings as more important than Adlers work.

Adler,
Freud, and Psycho-Analysis

In
1899 Adler attended a lecture by Sigmund Freud. In an interview in 1928, he recalled his
first contact with Freud:

At
that time, nervous disorders were treated symptomatically, through cold water cures, etc.
All these methods, to which hypnosis also belongs, seemed to me not to get at the root of
the problem and to be essentially not more than miracle cures. I searched deeper and
deeper to get at the basis of the psychological connections, encouraged by the writings of
Charcot and Janét. then in 1899 I attended a lecture by Dr. Freud who, like myself, was
attempting to find psychological connections of the various neuroses. I was a nerve
specialist and was interested in pathological anatomy and internal diseases. To recognize
these in advance, or rule them out, is in my opinion one of the most important
preconditions of any psychological treatment method. During 1902 I was invited to discuss
with Freud and some of his pupils the problems of neurosis. (Ansbachers, 1964, pp.
336-337)

In
1900 Freud published The Interpretation of Dreams. Novelist-turned-biographer Phyllis
Bottome said it was reviewed by the Neue Freie Presse, whose tradition was to ridicule
anything new, calling it "this new Egyptian dream book." She reports that Adler
wrote a letter of support which Freud took kindly. However, no such review or letter has
been found. (Bottome, who made her mark as a fiction writer, seems too much of a doting
Adler fan to also be an objective historian; hence, we take her "biography" of
him with a grain of salt!)

Sperber,
who met Adler in 1921, gives another version, that Adler attended Freuds lecture to
the Vienna Medical Association . When Freud met with hostility and ridicule, Adler
"was appalled, and expressed his feelings publicly in a medical journal, giving an
exhaustive account of Freuds lecture [and] demanding that Freud and his teachings be
given the attention they deserved. (Sperber, 1974, p. 23). Again, no such response by
Adler has been found.

Freud
knew of Adler as a widely-known and respected neurologist. They had met professionally on
at least one occasion, and Freud had referred patients to Adler. So in 1902 he invited
Adler to discuss the psychological treatment of neurosis, in a simple hand-written post
card something like this:

November
2, 1902:

Very
Honored Sir Colleague:

A
small circle of colleagues and followers is going to give me the pleasure of meeting at my
house once a week in the evening at half past eight in order to discuss themes which
interest us, psychology and neuropathology. I know of Reitler, Max Kahane, and Stekel.
Will you have the goodness to join us? We have agreed upon next Thursday, and I am
expecting your kind answer whether you would like to come and whether this evening would
suit you.

With
hearty greetings as your colleague,

S.
Freud

Ernest
Jones, Freuds biographer, notes that four men received such cards: Max Kahane and
Rudolph Reitler (two of Freuds patients), Wilhelm Stekel (a doctor and also a
patient), and Adler. Carl Furtmüller, Adlers close friend, later wrote of
Adlers impressions of those first meetings:

Adler
felt instinctively at first, then saw more and more clearly, that Freuds discoveries
opened a new phase in the development of psychiatry and psychology. There was the idea
that full insight into the elements of the patients mental life and their
connectedness was a basic prerequisite for a thorough cure. There was the conviction that
methods could be found to achieve this scrutiny of an individual psyche. And there was the
natural consequence that these new methods would cause a revolution not only in psychiatry
but in general psychology by adding to the study of formal laws of psychic phenomena the
study of the contents of the mind. (Ansbachers, 1964, p. 337)

For
the first six years meetings were held in Freuds home and were called, simply, the
"Wednesday Psychological Society." In 1909 it was renamed the Vienna
Psycho-Analytic Society. A year later, attendance (about 15 of the 30 members on average)
out-grew Freuds dining room, and meetings were moved to the Doctors Medical
College (Mediziunisches Doktoren-Kollegium) where Jones noted the atmosphere became
"chillier and more formal." (Jones, 1955, p. 130).

It
is often, but erroneously, believed that Adler was a "follower,"
"disciple" or "student" of Freud. While this was true of the others,
it was not so of Adler. In fact, throughout his association with Freud, he maintained a
personal and professional independence. He was never a "Freudian," and was never
psychoanalyzed, which made him unique among the Societys members. Rather, he came to
the group as, and continued to be, a well-known psychiatrist in his own right, an
independent thinker who attended to contribute and help formulate the psychological
treatment of neurosis. Hoffman reminds us that this idea was set forth by Freud himself,
in his 1914 paper, The History of the Psychoanalytic Movement, in which he said that
several group of admirers, including Adler, sought him out to teach them psychoanalysis,
which Freud generously agreed to do. (Hoffman, p. 42)

Adler
was always incensed that Freudians referred to him as a disciple. Abraham Maslow said he
dined with Adler in New York around 1935, at which time he raised the question of
Adlers Freudian "discipleship." Maslow notes that Adler "became very
angry, flushed, talking loudly enough to attract other peoples attention. He said
that this was a lie and a swindle for which he blamed Freud entirely . He said that he had
never been a student of Freud, or a disciple or a follower. He [said he had] made it clear
from the beginning that he didnt agree with Freud and that he had his own
opinions." (Maslow, 1962, p. 127)

From
the beginning, Adler was Freuds favorite. It has been widely noted that this was a
pattern Freud repeated several times: choosing a favorite, only to have that man
"turn against him." In the early years, it has been rumored that Adler was
briefly physician to Freud and some of Freuds family members.

In
1904, Adler treated 19-year-old Otto Rank for a lung problem. They discussed philosophy
and psychology, and in 1906 Adler invited Rank to attend a meeting of the society. He did,
and was hired to take minutes. One of his first tasks was to take notes of Adlers
talk On The Organic Bases of Neuroses based on his forthcoming book, A Study of
Organ Inferiority.

In
that talk and book, Adler made several key points: That neuroses derive from some organ
inferiority or weakness; that sexual precocity can be laid to such inferiority; and that
individuals strive to overcome such inferiority by compensation for the organic lack,
stressing that such efforts may become over-compensation aimed at dominance of the
inferior organ. Ranks notes say Freud responded positively to Adlers ideas.

When
the book itself was published three months later the membership, including Freud, were
enthusiastic. Adler was now seen as the major contributor, after Freud, of ideas to extend
psychological understanding and psycho-analysis.

Then
in 1908, in a published paper called The Aggression Drive in Life and in Neurosis,
Adler suggested aggression as a second key to personality, equal with sexuality. Freud
rejected the concept as not fitting within orthodox psycho-analysis. Adler had offered
another way to explain neuroses, a way which conflicted with Freuds libido-based
theories.

Adler:
The Rift With Freud

Several
things were happening in 1908-1910: Adlers ideas as well as his leadership were
becoming popular with more and more of the members; Freud had met the Swiss Protestant,
Carl Jung, and realized his ideas had a wider audience; at the same time, he began to
realize it was limited by its membership, which in Vienna was almost exclusively Jewish.

In
March, 1909, the International Psychoanalytical Convention was held in Germany. Through a
spokesman (Sandor Ferenczi) Freud proposed an international Psychoanalytical Society, with
Jung as its president. This led to an angry private meeting among some members, at which
Freud appeared and stated that the movement had no future so long as it was thought of as
only a Jewish movement:

Most
of you are Jews, and therefore you are incompetent to win friends for the new teaching.
Jews must be content with the modest role of preparing the ground. It is absolutely
essential that I should form ties with the world of general science. I am getting on in
years, and am weary of being perpetually attacked. We are all in danger The Swiss
will save us. (Quoted
in Hoffman, pp. 66-67)

Returning
to Vienna, the members were somewhat mollified when Freud appointed Adler as his successor
as president of the Vienna Society, and as coeditor of the societys Journal. For
about a year, Adler was happy in his new roles, bringing a new organization to what had
been a group of weekly discussants.

Even
so, in his presentations it became clearer that he was developing a viewpoint quite
different from Freuds. In a 1910 paper on "psychic hermaphroditism" (that
each person has both masculine and feminine traits), Adler proposed that childhood
inferiority begins as the child feels weak, unable, etc., ("feminine") compared
with adults who as strong, able, etc. He called this the "masculine protest.
"Such children are placed in a role which appears to them as unmanly. All neurotics
have a childhood behind them in which they were moved by doubt regarding the achievement
of full masculinity . . . The starting point for the feminine tendencies of the neurotic
is the childs feeling of weakness is the face of adults." (Ansbachers, p. 47)

The
term masculine protest relates to the idea that men who exhibit compassion, sympathy,
cooperation, and like "feminine" traits are less manly than those who exhibit
"masculine" traits: aggression, ambition, or competition. In rejecting their
natural masculinity, such men must make neurotic compensations. Likewise, Adler saw that
many women, seeking to go beyond gender definitions of a male-dominated society, felt a
similar "protest." Adler suggested this as another way to understand those who
came to psycho-analysis. It was a view that Freud had to reject.

Yet
many members agreed with Adler, and the differences between the two men became more
evident: Freud, the authoritarian, required uniformity under only his banner, and saw
himself as the emperor of the psycho-analytic empire. Adler, the social democrat, was
conciliatory, interested in the power of ideas, and saw himself as one member among equals
who all sought increased understanding. More important than personal considerations was
that Adlers ideas were becoming a direct challenge to Freudian orthodoxy. By his
talks and papers over several years, it was clear that Adler had positioned himself in a
separate theoretical place from Freud.

But
Freud, his eye on international recognition, did not want the world to see his society as
being in disarray. So in November, 1910, he demanded that all Society members must accept
his theory that sexual impulses form the basis for the entire psychic life in both
neurotic and normal personalities.

The
society's minutes indicate that at least half the members objected to what was essentially
a loyalty oath to Freud, and a rejection of Adlers ideas. So Eduard Hitschmann
(speaking for Freud) moved that one or more meetings be dedicated to the connections
between Adlers ideas and Freuds. Freud amended the motion to include specific
explanation of the masculine protest.

The
meetings were held on in January and February, 1911. Sources differ as to the titles of
the talks. Hoffman says Adlers first lecture. January 4, 1911, was called "Some
Problems of Psychoanalysis" (p. 70) while Stepansky says it was titled "The Role
of Sexuality in Neurosis" (p.113).

So
on January 4, 1911, Adler argued that sexuality is not sufficient to explain neurosis
because it is universal in all human beings. Something more is needed. He suggested his
earlier concepts of "compensation" and "over-compensation" as two
paths a child may take through life to make up for perceived inferiority in the face of
superior adults. This was linked to Adlers earlier ideas about organ inferiority.
Meeting minutes indicate that the talk was received positively, with few comments and then
mostly positive. Hoffman says that "the compatibility of Adlers views with the
basic tenets of psychoanalysis was not questioned, and the appropriateness of the Vienna
Society as a forum for the explication of Adlers theories was implicitly
conceded." (P. 117)

The
next several meetings were devoted to discussions of Adlers first talk. Freud did
not take part, but others seemed to speak for him. Paul Federn, especially, when he
remarked that "if sexuality is not the center and cause of the neuroses, then
Adlers views represent a real danger; he has done regressive work and aligned
himself with the opponents of Freuds teachings." (Hoffman, p. 70)

Adler
then gave his second, more detailed talk on February 1, 1911, "The Masculine Protest
as the Central Problem of Neurosis" (Hoffman) or "Repression and Masculine
Protest: Their Role and Significance for the Dynamism of Neurosis."
(Stepansky).

Although
Adler began, as he did in his first lecture, with praise for Freuds original
insights, he quickly moved on to introduce several differing ideas on the formation of
personality. He spoke of the influence of the "ego instinct" as it moves the
individual in the direction of importance, power, and even dominance. He said that this
impulse will influence the childs various relationships, including, but not limited
to, sexuality. He then introduced his idea that neuroses are formed by two forces:
"The budding of a feeling of inferiority connected with the inferiority of certain
organs; and, unmistakable indications of an actual fear of a feminine role. When these two
factors support each other, emotional life becomes falsified." (Hoffman, pp. 70-71)

He
then went on to justify "masculine protest" as a method for understanding
neurosis. Specifically, he introduced his belief that culture and its definition of gender
roles is a major factor in the development of neurosis. He gave as an example that women
are devalued by men in a male-dominated culture, so that their contributions and
"feminine" attributes are accorded lesser value than so-called
"masculine" ones. Instinctual drives, including sexuality, may give a direction
(richtunggebendes Mittel) but do not, alone, explain neurosis.

Adler
suggested that the Egos safe-guarding ability to avoid psychic harm helps manage
inferiority feelings. How the individual experiences sexually, influenced by social
forces, and what the person does as a result, and not sexuality itself, is the key.
Neurotic personality is distinguished from normal personality by what individuals do to
overcome feelings of inferiority. Most people compensate within a normal range; others
over-compensate and cross the line to neurosis.

Adler
thus portrayed the infant not as at the mercy of instincts, but as an active participant
in adapting to the circumstances of life. Clearly, in Adlers new "ego
psychology," Ego supplants Libido and interpersonal forces (e.g., culture) are set
forth as at least as important as intrapsychic forces. Although there is no record that
Adler used the term, it is here that he introduces what would become his "principle
of the psychology of use," that symptoms may be as useful in attaining goals which
serve the individuals goals.

The
debates led to heated discussion and much dissension among the members. Freud himself was
not conciliatory. He began by accusing Adler of taking over his own concepts and simply
renaming them. He then described Adlers approach as of great harm to psychoanalysis,
as reactionary and retrogressive. And he then said that Adlers approach (by
down-playing sexuality) might gain him followers in the short run, but that, "Instead
of psychology, it presents, in large part, biology. Instead of the psychology of the
unconscious, it presents ego psychology. Instead of the psychology of the libido, of
sexuality, it offers general psychology. . . . It is ego psychology, deepened by the
knowledge of the psychology of the unconscious." (Hoffman, p. 71)

The
next two meetings contained only reactions to Adlers ideas, mostly in a very heated
and negative vein. Among Adlers defenders was Stekel, who alone of the members had
been with both men from the first meeting. He said that "Adlers views are not
incompatible with Freuds but are simply a structure built on Freuds
foundation." Freud responded, "While Stekel does not see any contradiction
between Adlers views and Freuds doctrines, one has to point out that two of
the persons involved do find this contradiction: Adler and Freud." (Hoffman, p. 72)

The
writing was on the wall, and Adler resigned his presidency of the Society that same
evening. He continued to edit the society journal, and to attend meetings, until the break
for summer vacation. During the summer, Freud told the publisher that he could no longer
work with Freud on the journal, and that the publisher must choose between them. Word of
this got to Adler, who submitted the following in the August issue:

Herewith
I should like to notify the readers of this periodical that as of today I have resigned
from the editorship of this periodical. The editor-in-chief of the periodical, Professor
Freud, was of the opinion that between himself and myself there are such large scientific
differences that a joint editorship would appear unfeasible. I have therefore decided to
resign from the editorship of the periodical voluntarily. (Ansbachers, 1973, p.344, n.)

When
the membership learned of this, twelve members wrote a letter of protest of Freuds
actions, and stated that they, at least, would continue to seek to work with Adler. This
led Freud, at the first meeting after the summer break (October 11, 1911) to move formally
that there could be no "dual membership" with his group and any that Adler might
form. Eight of Adlers friends thanked the group for all they had learned while being
members, and left.

Stepansky
notes that it was neither theoretical differences between the two men, nor a consensus
among the members that the twos views were not compatible nor which led Adler to
leave the group. Rather, it is clear that Freud had a political agenda, and Adler was a
liability. Thus "[Adlers] resignation of the Society presidency and subsequent
departure from the group was the product of a premeditated assault engineered entirely by
Freud." (p. 146)

The
Development of Individual Psychology

In
a few weeks Adler and the others formed what they were calling The Society for Free
Psycho-Analytic Research. Freud objected that "free" meant his members were not
free to think independently, and insisted that the term "psycho-analytic" be
reserved for his own approach.

Adlers
group did not want to be seen as a rebellious sect but as an independent group of
thinkers. So they looked for another name. Personality Psychology was considered, but was
already in use by another approach very different from Adlers. The decision being
Adlers, in 1912 he chose Individual Psychology to stress that personality is
indivisible ("Individual" from the Latin individuum, meaning "that
which is whole and inseparable"). This was to contrast with Freuds separating
of the mind into Id/Ego/Super-Ego. Even though Adler "went his own way" and the
parting with Freud was not amicable, records of the Vienna Psycho-Analytic Society show
that Adler continued to attended its meetings for several months.

The
new group began to meet regularly at Adlers apartment to discuss Adlers ideas,
Raissa being the groups recording secretary. When the apartment became too small for
them, a larger place was found. Furtmüller, who was with Adler from the beginning,
described the new group this way:

There
could be no orthodoxy on principle but there was the general eagerness to study
Adlers ideas, to confront them with other doctrines, to try to find out what
contributions they could add in different fields of thought. (They) soon sensed how much
more stimulating the work was under the new circumstances. They could speak freely without
fear that a daring word would evoke the dismay of [Freud]. They could express their
thoughts in their own way and look for terms which might best express what they wanted to
say, whereas before, the Freudian terminology had unavoidably handicapped the free play of
ideas. From the beginning the hospitable atmosphere of the new group was in complete
contrast to the strict seclusion of the Freud circle. This was to be characteristic of
Adlers groups for the entire future. Never were there initiation rites, nor spoken
or unspoken oaths of allegiance. Every member could introduce a guest. Psychiatrists,
psychologists, and writers visiting Vienna were invited. ( Ansbachers, 1964, p355-356)

Clearly
the atmosphere was one of encouragement, acceptance of variant ideas, and charged
creativity. Released from Freuds insistence on agreement with him, they saw
themselves at the beginning of a new and largely uncharted territory, where their
contributions could make a real difference.

By
1912, Adler had completed The Nervous Character, and had submitted it to the Vienna
Medical School as basis for non-paying teaching position. He had by now established almost
all of the major categories of Individual Psychology, including the "As If"
principle, fictions and Fictional Finalism, inferiority feelings and superiority
strivings, Guiding Goals, and the like. (Furtmüller would later say it "lacked only
the final pillar" of the complete Adlerian system, that is, Social Interest).

Around
this time that Raissa and Alfred had a "trial separation," as Raissa took the
children for an extended vacation to her homeland of Russia.

The
next year he published several articles on the role of the unconscious in neurosis and the
clinical practice of IP: principles of the practice of IP, individual-psychological
treatment of neuroses, as well as his preference for face-to-face meeting with patients
rather than Freuds use of the couch with the clinician sitting behind and out of
sight of the patient.

The
summer of 1914 signaled the beginning of World War I, with the assassination of Archduke
Ferdinand. With the growing tensions in Europe, Adler begged Raissa to return to Vienna.

Also
in 1914, Adler started the Societys professional journal, The Individual
Psychologist, of which he and Furtmüller were coeditors. Publication was suspended
after only a few issues with the outbreak of World War I. That same year, the two men were
coeditors of Healing and Education: Medical-Educational Papers of the Society for
Individual Psychology. This collection moved Adler firmly into the field of education. In
his closing words to this volume, he spoke of the undeniable need for physicians and
educators to work together. Individual Psychology is for us an artistic endeavor which
enables us to regard all expressive movements in the context of a self-consistent
becoming. The result is the following most important presupposition for the practice of
education: to sharpen the sense of reality through illumination of the unrecognized life
plan and through its revision, and to remove pathological and asocial aberrations through
change of the self-created system." (Adler, 1914, p 399.)

At
this time also, Adler had begun a correspondence with G. Stanley Hall. The most prominent
psychologist of that time in the United States, Hall had brought Freud to lecture at Clark
University in Worcester, Mass., and introduced Freuds ideas to America. Yet
Halls own published articles indicated that he preferred Adler to Freud. Hall
encouraged Adler to conduct a series of lectures in the United States, a project that
would wait twelve years.

And
in this same year, Freud completed and published his monograph, The History of the
Psychoanalytic Movement, in which he originated certain myths regarding the
beginnings of the psycho-analytic movement. As Hoffman notes, in it Freud

recounted
that a group of early admirers had sought him out to teach them psychoanalysis, and that
among these was Alfred Adler. Freud paternally agreed to do so, and such was the origin of
the Wednesday Psychological Society. Ever since this condescending account was published,
Freudian adherents have described Adler as a mere "pupil" or even a
"disciple" of their esteemed leader. Freuds version is likewise erroneous,
more for its crucial omissions than for what it badly present. (pp. 41-42)

In
1915, the Vienna College of Professors rejected The Nervous Character (or The Neurotic
Constitution) as being "more philosophy than medicine." A result was that Adler
could not teach in the medical school. Adlers daughter, Alexandra, would note later
that this signaled the beginning of Adlers taking Individual Psychology beyond the
medical professions directly to the general public.

In
1916 Adler was drafted into Austrian army as physician, serving at a hospital in
Semmering, some 50 miles southwest of Vienna. His main job was to return soldiers to the
front as quickly as possible. He soon came to realize that psychology was being used
mainly as a method for separating out malingerers.

In
early 1917, Adler was transferred to an Austrian hospital in Krakow, Poland, and again in
November, was transferred to the Vienna district of Grinzing which was dedicated almost
exclusively to the treatment of soldiers with typhus. Adler returned home during his
leaves, where he spoke with his friends about what he had learned during his war-time
experiences, including the need for "fellow feelings" as a psychological
principle.

Adler
was among the first to recognize that war took a psychological toll on many soldiers,
resulting in debilitating psychiatric conditions which lasted long after the war-time
events. In January of 1918 he wrote a major paper on "war neuroses," which
became required reading for military doctors in Germany for the next thirty years. (The
condition was later called "shell shock," and today is part of the psychiatric
term, "post traumatic stress disorder.")

After
World War I

His
war experiences also led him to the final "pillar" of his psychology:
Gemeinschaftsgefühl, usually translated as "social interest" although sometimes
as "community feeling" or "fellow feeling." As Furtmüller puts it,

The
concentration of Adlers thinking during the war, on this problem of mans wish
for human contacts and cooperation, was not motivated by broad, general aspects of the
war, What stirred his attention was, again, his contact with the common man, the ordinary
soldiers, the wounded and sick in the army hospitals. For them war was not a political or
social problem, but a disaster which breaks upon the individual, and the individual has to
go through with it like any other catastrophes of life. (Furtmüller,Ansbachers, 1964, p.
370)

During
this period, he wrote and published on various topics, and was invited to deliver a speech
to the Zurich Association of Physicians. In it, he called for prevention as a focus of
psychology. This new idea (psychology to that time considered for as treatment only) was
picked up by several news services. Adlers name now became known around the world,
the first indication that his work would soon receive international recognition.

On
November 11, Armistice was declared, which plunged Austria into several years of famine
and poverty as a now-partitioned Europe struggled with a post-war depression.

Returning
after the war, Adler and the Society renewed their activities with a new intensity.
Journal publication was resumed, ways were sought to integrate the concept of social
interest into the larger system, and they began to find new arenas in which to strive.
Chief among these was education, specifically adult education, school reform, teacher
training, and child guidance.

Over
the next several years, Adler wrote and lectured on a variety of topics, including
child-rearing, prostitution, juvenile psychology, pre-delinquent and delinquent youth. In
1919 he started the first of more than 30 child guidance clinics based on his methods. And
that fall he began offering the first of what would become many psychology courses at
Peoples Institute.

In
1921, at the age of 16, a young Manes Sperber attended one of these courses and was
impressed enough to become one of Adlers most devoted followers. He also became a
devoted Marxist/Leninist, helping to form a "Marxist Wing" within Individual
Psychology. At a 1925 meeting, Sperber, with several others of the "Marxist
Wing" of IP, challenged one of the speakers, Rudolph Allers, for not being socialist
enough. "At this point, the twenty-year-old Sperber angrily leaped to his feet and
tore Allers papers to shreds. Allers . . . turned to Adler for defense. To the
surprise and shock of the entire society, he stood up and said, 'But perhaps the boy is
right!' " (Hoffman, p. 144)

But
by 1930 Adler had had enough. At the fifth International Congress for Individual
Psychology in Berlin, he told Sperber "to end his communist proselytizing and that he
[Adler] wanted nothing to do with such misguided activity." (Hoffman, p. 258) Years
later, in 1970, in his book subtitled "Alfred Adler in Perspective," Sperber
would write,

Adler
was alarmed at the danger to individual psychology which seemed to threaten from the
direction of its Marxist wing. He accused his Marxist followers of hopelessly compromising
his doctrine and systematically provoking the ire of the rightists and Nazis. Adler
determined to use all available means to destroy our position, or at least to weaken it so
much that our entire influence would evaporate. Everyone had to know that we were no
longer individual psychologists and thus had no right to invoke him or his teachings.
(Sperber, p. 223)

Making
the situation more difficult for Adler was that, during this same time, his wife, Raissa,
was an advocate of communism, lecturing and writing on the subject. And indeed, it is
clear that Adler himself, in lectures, writings, and classes during this period, held a
certain socialist flavor. Which led him to champion the cause of educational reform,
including teacher-education. The idea for "teaching teachers" had come early in
Adlers career, as he says:

In
1898 I wrote my first article developing my idea of the relation between medicine in the
larger sense and the school. Later, in connection with an extension class, I conducted a
clinic. It was only a small beginning and a very unsatisfactory one in the face of the
great need for child guidance. Thus was born the plan to teach the teachers, for through
the school I could reach hundreds of children at once. Then came the war, postponing all
my plans. (Ansbachers, 1956, p. 392)

Vienna
University was not interested in including teacher training in its curriculum. So
Viennas municipal government decided to establish its own school, the
Pedagogical Institute. This in turn led to the creation of the Institute of Psychology,
which emphasized developmental and educational psychology.

Adler,
for several years a regular lecturer at the Peoples Institute, became a professor at the
Pedagogical Institute in 1924. His classes included "The Difficult Child " and
"Problem Children in the Classroom," in which he used a case-study approach to
illustrate Individual Psychology principles. In his first three years, Adler taught more
than 600 teachers. From this period comes his famous educational motto, "Anyone can
learn anything."

As
noted, in 1919 he started the first child guidance clinic in Vienna. In a few years there
were over thirty such clinics, the Erziehungsberatungsstelle (family education centers),
involving teachers, parents, and children. Here Adler pioneered early forms of group and
family therapy. According to Alexandra Adler, the centers had the cooperation and
sponsorship of the government. Each was staffed by a physician, psychologist, and social
worker.

Adlers
attempts to effect change in education were resisted by those wedded to the traditional
authoritarian ways. And with Hitlers victory in 1934, all "educational
reforms" dating back to 1919 were abolished as "fostering democracy."
(Hitlers rise to power was doubtless a factor in Adlers decision to emigrate
to the US in 1935.)

By
the 1920s, Adler had achieved international prominence. He had devoted followers and child
guidance centers in the US. In 1924 he published a summary of his ideas to that point in Praxis
und Theorie der Individualpsycholgie (published in 1927 as The Theory and Practice of
Individual Psychology).

Around
the same time, an American psychiatrist, Walter Wolfe, came to Vienna to study under
Adler. Wolfe would became the first American member of the Society, and Adler would
appoint him as assistant editor of the international journal, and English translator of
Understanding Human Nature which was to have a great effect on the American public.

In
1925, a London Magistrate visited the US and was so impressed by the Adlerian child
guidance centers there that she returned to England to form similar programs. Such
interest led to the formation of a London branch of the International Society for
Individual Psychology.

Adler
in the US

In
America, a number of universities had invited Adler to speak, among them Harvard, Brown,
and the University of Chicago. Despite some misgivings about sailing so far away, and
leaving his wife and children behind, (and a bad dream the night before leaving), He left
Southampton, England, on the luxury liner S.S. Majestic, in late November of 1926. While
aboard, he spent time perfecting his English, since he was determined to address his
audiences in English, unlike Freud, who spoke only German in his one US lecture at Clark
University.

Adler
spent his first few weeks in lectures at New York hospitals and churches, and in meeting
new friends, among them Ira Ewile, MD, a pediatrician and educator who had established a
child guidance clinic attached to Mt. Sinai hospital. As Adlers presence became
known (and because he had just come from Europe, in whose politics Americans were
interested) he was increasingly the subject of newspaper interviews. Hoffman notes,
"Published the day after Christmas, the Worlds detailed article featured a
prominent sketch of Adler absorbed in thought. The banner headline read Mussolini
Spurred to his Fight for Power by Pique Over Inferiority as a Child, Says, Dr. Alfred
Adler." (Hoffman, p. 175)

More
important to the development of Individual Psychology, however, was his statement to one
reporter that "the behavior patterns of persons can be studied from their relation to
three things: to society, to work, to sex," which would become "the three tasks
of life" in Adlerian thought, and which he expanded in his lecture on January 11,
1927, to the prestigious New York Academy of Medicine.

Adler
spend the next weeks lecturing in Providence, RI, and Boston, at the same time meeting
with admirers who would go on to become key leaders in education. Hoffman (p. 179) notes
that, while in Boston, he addressed the DAR, where one member told him, "Our
ancestors came over on the Mayflower." To which he responded, "Yes, yes, and I
cam over on the Majestic!" Adler had not quite gotten the hang of English, but his
slips were treated with humor and kindness by the press.

From
February 13, Adler spent six weeks in the Midwest. He received an enthusiastic reception
in Chicago, where he was invited by the board of education to deliver lectures for
teachers and school administrators. Hoffman (p. 181) notes that more than 2500
applications for tickets had to be turned down due to lack of space in the Field Museum,
which seated several thousand.

After
additional Midwest lectures with similar receptions, he returned to New England for
several more meetings, then to New York, and sailed for home on the S. S. Leviathan on
April 11, a very satisfied man. Only one thing bothered him: despite his enthusiastic
letters to Raissa, he had received none from her, and he was getting the impression that
she did not share his feelings of success.

The
next two years saw Adler working to increase the influence of IP throughout Europe and New
Britain through lectures, consultation, and setting up educational and child guidance
programs. His efforts were hampered on two sides.

On
the professional side, there was the increasing pressure of Sperbers group to
convince Adler to side with Marxism. In addition was a recent book by Alice Gerstel, who
had been drawn to Individual Psychology as a student in Munich. In 1924 she wrote Freud
and Adler, comparing the two approaches. But in 1927 her The Road to We: An Attempt to
Combine Marxism with Individual Psychology (and its enthusiastic acceptance by Sperber et
al) confronted Adler with the Marxist/Leninist sub-group that was seeking to turn
Individual Psychology to its own purposes.

On
the personal side were his increasing marital difficulties. Despite his efforts to help
Raissa set up their new country home about an hour from Vienna, these did not seem to
offset a growing coolness on her part and the feeling that she resented her husbands
many new friends and new-found international success. All of this was on Adlers mind
as he prepared for his second and even more extensive tour of the US. It appears that he
believed it would be much like the first, and so was quite surprised to find such a large
gathering awaiting him as he disembarked on February 11, 1928, and the major press
conference held for him at his hotel.

His
way had been paved for him by the November, 1927, publication of Understanding Human
Nature. Already in its second printing when he arrived, it was a runaway best-seller.
Indeed, Hoffman states, in a note beneath a reproduction of the books advertisement,
"with astute marketing by Greenberg Publisher, Adlers books gained great
popularity in the United States and helped create the new genre of self
help." The book sold over 100,000 copies in three printings in the first six
months.

The
book was actually based on lectures Adler had given at the Vienna Peoples Institute,
from notes taken by Walter Wolfe. As Hoffman has noted,

As
would become the pattern for Adlers many popular books to follow, he had little to
do with its actual writing. . . . Adler lacked any stylistic flair. Aside from
dashing off chatty letters to far-flung family members, he derived no pleasure from
writing. As a professional activity, Adler regarded writing as only a vehicle by which his
ideas could reach an audience wider than the consulting room or lecture hall. (P. 197)

Adler
spent his first month in the US lecturing at the New School for Social Research, founded
just eight years earlier, in Manhattan. He also led classes at the Institute for Child
Guidance in New York, among whose students was Carl Rogers, who recalled later in life how
much Adler had influenced him.

Adler
next went again to New England and the Midwest, this time in many more cities, receiving
enthusiastic receptions by both professionals and the lay public, and positive articles
and reviews in both local newspapers and national magazines.

Adler's Last Years

On his way home in May, Adler stopped in London to
discuss the publication of his English lectures. His editor, Philip Mairet, had just
published The ABCs of Adlerian Psychology, the first popular English book about Individual
Psychology. Hoffman (p. 210-211) indicates Mairets surprise at the jumble of
disorganized material that Adler expected him to create a book from, as well as
Adlers apparent disregard for the process. It appears that Adler simply trusted his
editor to develop the book with the only caveat being, "Do not fear to elaborate or
extend in our sense."

Adler returned to Vienna flushed with the success
not only of his latest US tour, but of his secure knowledge that he had many loyal friends
at home. The following year appears to have included (in addition to public lectures, the
training of therapists, and starting more child-guidance clinics) a daily sameness.

He came to his office early, and worked alone until
around 11 AM. Then he would invite friends and colleagues to gather to talk about clinical
or educational matters. At 2 PM he would begin seeing patients. At least once a week an
evening was spent with friends at the Café Siller, discussing Individual Psychology.

Adlers third American tour began in January
1929. It was hoped that he newest book would generate a response similar to Understanding
Human Nature. It did not. Published the year before in Germany under a lengthy title, it
was published in the US as The Case of Miss R. Hardly anyone bought it or read it, and it
is generally considered today to be Adlers least-well-known book.

Adler began his tour with a visit to California,
where he lectured at and visited colleges and local schools. By early March he was again
lecturing at the New School for Social Research in New York, in two classes of some forty
lectures. One was an introductory course in Individual Psychology, while the second was on
advanced applications of IP to specific issues. Also, he conducted live demonstrations of
his method of interviewing children and parents. From transcriptions of these
demonstrations came another book, The Pattern of Life, involving 12 cases.

During this stay, he worked hard to establish
parent-education centers modeled on those begun in Austria. It was estimated that 40,000
people took part in his parenting classes in the first six months. (Hooper and Holford, p.
123)

After his return to Vienna in the summer of 1929,
Adler decided to relocate to the United State permanently. Raissa refused to join him,
because her friends were in Vienna, she did not speak English, and she abhorred American
politics. Thus began an informal but amicable marital separation, seeing each other each
summer. But in 1935, Adler became ill and wrote a telegram to his wife from his hospital
bed in America, asking her to join him. She agreed, but said she would come only to
support him in his illness, and on the condition they would return to Vienna for the
summer.

In 1933, their oldest daughter, Valentine, had
moved to Moscow with her husband. She was never heard from again, letters and telegrams
being returned. Adlers inability to learn anything about her cast a dark shadow on
the remaining years of his life. Only after intervention with the Russian government, by
Adlers friend Dr. Albert Einstein in 1945, was it discovered that she had been
imprisoned in a Siberian gulag, where she died in 1942. For Adler, the news came eight
years too late.

When Alfred and Raissa stepped off the boat in New
York in September of 1935, reporters were on hand to interview them. Adler is reported to
have delivered a statement about "the foolishness of thinking that women are
inferior. Womens inferiority is a male lie, and repetition of the lie is responsible
for women believing it." (Hooper and Holford, p. 134).

He settled in New York as Professor of Medical
Psychology at the Long Island School of Medicine. By this time his approach had become
popular world-wide, and nearly three dozen associations of Individual Psychology had been
formed in many countries. By all accounts, Adler spent the last two years of his life
constantly writing, conducting therapy, teaching, and planning or carrying out lecture
tours. The most extensive of all, covering six countries in 3 months, was set for 1937.
One morning on that tour, in Edinburgh, Scotland, he decided to go for a morning walk. He
collapsed of a heart attack, and died in the ambulance on the way to the hospital.
Following are selections from a poignant reminiscence by Adlers life-long friend
Carl Furtmüller:

An indefatigable worker all his life, Adler labored
harder than ever in the years he divided his activities between Europe and America. One
may say that year after year he did a full years job on each continent. What
normally should have been times of vacation became periods of especially concentrated work
for him. There were his numerous courses and lectures, his work at clinics and with
private patients, and preparation of a long series of papers and books to be published. .
. .

Unfortunately there were more serious consequences
of his overworking. Advancing age would have demanded economizing of his forces. He did
not care, confident of his seemingly unconquerable physical health. During his whole life
he had had only three attacks of serious illness. But now, finally, the strain was too
much. His heart began to give out, and Adler, always the astute diagnostician, knew it.
Maybe he had set himself a term after which he would relax or at least diminish his
activities. For when friends warned him against overdoing it in the spring of 1937, he
answered, smiling, that he would take a real vacation the next year. That was not to be.
In April, 1937, Adler went to Europe, and from April 26 to May 28 he gave lectures in
Paris, Belgium, Holland, and Scotland. At the end of May he went to Aberdeen to give a
course of lectures at the University for medical students and student teachers. other
lectures were added to the program. It was the concentration of work Adler was always used
to, and he enjoyed it as always. On the morning of May 28 he took a walk. Suddenly he
collapsed. he died in the ambulance which was taking him to the hospital. (Furtmüller, in
Ansbacher & Ansbacher, 1964, pp. 390-392)